The cambrien explosion is a stab wound. The fossil record is a series of deep cuts, and scientific research is a killing blow. Evolution did not happen and there is every reason to conclude thusly.
@MagnusCattus The cambrian explosion is predicted by current models of evolution due to the fact that precambrian organisms had not yet evolved the more efficient oxygen-based respritory systems
@libalchris Yes a million years ago marshmellows ruled the earth, they had no bones therefore left no fossisl. Good luck my friend. To anyone rational, a tremendous lack of fossils would mean a tremendous lack of evidence for evolution, and coincedentaly fits right along with the christian creation account. Now I'm bit saying that perhaps what you have to say is meritless, but it is by faaaaaar inadequate for me.
@MagnusCattus "To anyone rational, a tremendous lack of fossils would mean a tremendous lack of evidence for evolution..."
First off evolution has already been proven as much as can be just through the field of genetics. Further fossils found prior to, within, and after the Cambrian support the theory and line up pretty nicely with what is known in other fields. As a final point fossils of decreasing complexity the further back in time you go stretch back for about three billion of years...
@whitefox998 Evolution as never been proved, if you are gona dance around with pretty definitions be my guest. We have seen small mutations, never ever observed macro evolution. The cambrien explosion nullifies everything you have said. AND GUESS WHAT, if a fossil looks like another one, who the hell gets to say its related? its either THE SAME CREATURE, or NOT THE SAME. see how that works? Evolution has not been proven. I'm not going to let an atheist dictate to me what is fact.
@MagnusCattus Evolution has been proven as much as scientifically possibly, macroevolution has been directly observed and is supported by every field in biology, and the theory is positively supported by the Cambrian explosion. And I don't have to dictate anything, I can present evidence to support my position which also flatly disproves yours. If you'd like me to I am more than willing but it'd have to be somewhere where we're aren't limited to a 500 character limit. You game?
"There is no way evolution can explain the Cambrian Explosion." If we were living in the time of Charles Darwin, this would be true. However, we are not. Scientists have not been sitting around twiddling their thumbs in the century and a half that has passed since the Origin of Species was written. Scientists have since found a perfectly reasonable explanation for the Cambrian Explosion, called punctuated equilibrium. Besides, even if science had no idea what caused the Cambrian Explosion,
theory did not explain punctuated equilibrium. If evolution were conclusively proven wrong tommorow, the scientific community would reject it as it has done for countless other hypotheses that did not withstand the harsh light of scrutiny. The only reason that evolution became a scientific theory in the first place was due to the fact that it made accurate predictions of the results of future experiments, and all of the massing evidence found fit into them.
First of all, there is no such thing as a Darwinist. It is merely a term invented by creationists to rationalize their opponent, by implying that people who support evolution have blind faith in its "teachings", without actually testing it. This is a good summary of religion; however, it is a terrible description of evolution and of the proponents of evolutionary theory. No one worships Charles Darwin or his ideas; the very notion is ridiculous. Charles Darwin was racist, and his original
I see plenty of angry emotion in your posts, but very little in mine. I do not resort to name calling or referring to myself as a "big dog." And what are the credentials to be a "big dog," anyway? My evidence comes from over 150 years of research into the field of evolutionary biology, which has been independently verified by researchers around the world. There are plenty of books out there to get started--"The Making of the Fittest" by Sean B. Carroll is one of the best.
It has been proven, that DNA travels on energy frequencies. There are measurable rays of energy shooting out from the galactic center. Is it so radical to believe in the science that our planet is showing us? of course you would have to remove the fairy tail ideas taught from religion and Idealists. Human evolution has gaps as well not shown in history. Do we chalk it up to little green men? Or, do we open our minds and stretch the bounderies of quantum possibilities?
@Therighttotruth "it has been proven"? Cite it. Show me how a macromolecule made of C, H, N, O, and P can travel by anything other than the known atomic forces. Be prepared to show your work. "Measurable rays of energy"? Uh, you mean radio? At a powerlevel far weaker than anything found on the planet?
Folks, please don't listen to the knuckleheads in this video. Get your information from real scientists and experts in the field. There are fossils from before the Cambrian. Look up the small shelly fauna (Ediacaran period), even stromatolites (the world's oldest fossils, from over 2.5 billion years ago). There are also good scientific reasons why few fossils exist from earlier periods. An excellent book about the real science is "Evolution: What the Fossils Mean and Why It Matters."
I got the name of the book wrong. It's "Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters," by Donald Prothero. A great book that, even though it is written by a scientist in the field, is easily understood by the layman.
Evolutionists are carried over edge with their obsession with evolution "theory"... Even Darwin himself has doubts after cambrian explosion... Cambrian "explosion" is still a mystery to be solved... Evolution proven not able to answer this event...
@dino339 It's interesting to hear creationists talk about the "Cambrian explosion." Invariably, they rely on data that appears to be from circa 1850, and obviously, they know nothing about myriad discoveries in the 160 years since about the fossil record prior to the Cambrian, or about atmospheric and other physical conditions on Earth in the distant past. Incidentally, despite the claims of the willfully ignorant, the so-called Cambrian explosion took place over about 20 million years.
@WildwoodClaire1 evolution as a theory is still a weak concept, there are no fossils found that shows the transition to evolution to this Date!! and also no pre-cambrian fossiles found... i dare to ask any evolution believer to link me to ONE Valid scientific source that shows REAL fossil that shows Real transition!!!!!
@dino339 Actually, quite a lot of Precambrian fossils have been discovered over the past 150 years. For example, Stromatolites are well known from the Precambrian. What appears to have happened in the period between 600 and 400 million years ago was that oxygen levels in the atmosphere gradually approached the levels of today and organsims capable of generating calcareous and siliceous exoskeletons evolved. Organisms with hard parts are more likely to be preserved as fossils.
@dino339 It isn't difficult to find lists of transitional fossils. Google "transitional fossils." Better still, take a biology class. You speak of "belief," but acceptance of evolution is based on myriad physical evidence and over 150 years of peer-reviewed research. I suppose the sheer mass of evidence for biological evolution does make your situation as a devotee of a particulatr ancient mythology lamentable, but reality can sometimes be a bit painful.
@dino339 Why don't you do your own research instead of parroting the lies you hear in these videos by (Christian!!!) creationists? You asked for transitional fossils so smugly as if you think they don’t exist, you do realize you are wrong don’t you? Why don’t you use Google, there is a ton of info out there on the web, are you scared to look? Why? Are you not going to believe it anyway so you don’t bother? Anyways here’s a start, type this into Google “Evolution of mammalian auditory ossicles”.
@dino339 As has already been mentioned there are many animals living today that already fulfill your transitional criteria. Whales evolved from a wolf sized land mammal that lived some 60 million years ago but are now full aquatic. They still have all the mammalian traits, i.e. they give birth to live young which in tern feed from their mothers mammary glands, they return to the surface to breath, and some species still show evidence of vestigial limb and pelvic structures, and so on...
Too bad the Cambrian explosion completely invalidates biblical creation, isn't it. See the Burgess Shales---the largest fossil deposits from the Camrian. What is found there? All sorts of wierd things, but no fish, no mammals, no dinosaurs, no reptiles, no hominids, in fact NO VERTEBRATES AT ALL--> nothing with a backbone. Creationism says everything was created in 6 days, but here is evidence that is complete crap. What is the answer? Evolution! Too bad, sooo sad.
@gregrutz Nearly a billion and a half, to be more accurate. Life has spent a billion years being single-celled; then it spent another half a billion years, with the most elaborate living things being very simple multi-celled organisms, including sponges.
OF COURSE bacteria doesn't fossilize; only bones and shells fossilize. Sharks don't fossilize either, having cartilaginous skeletons; we only get teeth from them.
This video is so ridiculously full of shit. Obvious creatards.
This (and part 2) are comedy gold! I will have to do a vid response just to the points that are plain false. One point that is important to realize is that there are 36 currently recognized animal phyla, of these 5 are Precambrian, 10 are Cambrian, 8 appear after the Cambrian, and 13 have no known fossil record but are alive today. What about plants and fungi? ALL appear after the Cambrian. Kind of hard to explain in a Genesis framework, isn't it?
OH MY GOD!! Darwin was wrong about slow and gradual ! The theory is wrong and had to be updated, it was not alway gradual. Wow ! And he didn't even know about the 5 or 6 great mass extinctions, like the one that killed the dinosaurs.
10 million years, oh, dear; we barely have time to wipe our nose :)) Never mind that the oldest Homo Sapiens branch is less than 4 my old, and how many branches evolved and went extinct since then.
Or that a quick peek at Wikipedia puts the Cambrian explosion as lasting between 30 and 50 my.
Or that the evidence for evolution extends well beyond fossils, into genetics, comparative morphological analysis, and others. In not one fossil existed, evolution would still stand on these
@StrikaAmaru Indeed, evolutionary theory is probably amongst the most well-supported scientific theories we have ever examined.. and how enriching is it not!?
I find that just the perspective it gives to view individual organisms in this theoretical paradigm is breathtakingly beautiful, meaningful, and enlarges the importance and value of virtually every aspect of an organisms existence to a degree that is nigh-unfathomable! :)
@BunkyOhare It's worse than out-of-date: it's deliberate lying:
- the cambr expl: 30-50 my, NOT 10.
- fossilization: bacteria won't fossilize; the closest we have to fossils are carbonaceous or silicate-based shells that single-celled organisms make around them. Not all make such shells, just like not all multi-celled organisms have a skeleton.
- evolution: is also supported by genetics, and others. A misplaced fossil would topple evolution, but lack of transitional forms in a small area won't.
they sya it happened over night "in geological sense" meaning that they actually didnt just appear, in geology you talk about the world being formed a year ago, that is the geological sense of time... therefore we say that the first upright human from 16000 years ago appeared yesterday in "GEOLOGICAL SENSE" this isnt saying that they just appeared with no evolution so this is saying god is a myth :P
"All these differences appear all together at the same time."
.
They evolved over 10 million years which is hardly, "at the same time".
.
"The suddenness of it defies the Darwinian mechanism's ability to produce new structures." What? Have none of these PhDs read Steven Gould? How about getting up to date with the science. Punctuated equilibrium anyone?
.
This video is rife with distortions and omissions filtered through shoddy scholarship. This crap wouldn't last a moment under peer review.
Wow, what a horrible mis-representation of the cambrian explosion, and why the hell are they dwelling on what darwin said? these people think we haven't learned anything since darwin, they are that backwards. There is no "problem" for evolution from the cambrian explosion, these animals evolved over about 20 million years, in what way is that fast? and the "wide gradually narrow" thing doesn't make sense, are they stating that these phyla joined together at some point?
Nice try creationists, trying to turn scientific data against itself. Low blow. Then again with no facts of your own you have to steal something resembling common sense from somewhere.
Obviously creationists made it. Every trick in the creationist playbook is offered here and every distortion, exclusion, presumption and outright lie makes an appearance as well.
.
The text refers people to the ColdwaterMedia site, the infamous producers of "EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed", Ben (the weasle) Steins appalling propaganda piece. That should settle the pedigree of this pile of tripe too.
Its funny how many creationists believe that the earth was created 6-10k years ago.. and then try to use the cambrian explosion to try to disprove evolution.. eventhough it was mllions of years ago hahaha
This video is creationism in disguise. The rate of evolution is not a constant and environmental factors made the Cambrian era a time with rapid evolution. Not all phyla came to exist in this timeframe. And only life in water existed. It's quite silly to think that some invisible magician God existed during those many 10 million years dropping lifeforms into water from the sky, isn't it? And surely such an imagined God is a different God than the God of the Bible :-)
This clip is definitely out of date. What about the various fossils from the Ediacaran period (the period before the Cambrian, and thus before the Cambrian explosion)?
The information here is quite outdated and intended to disseminate lies about evolution in order to promote intelligent design and the Christian theocratic worldview. It features a staunch Unification Church 'moonie' Jonathan Wells, whose intent is to spread the pseudoscience of intelligent design among the scientific community and the general public. Fossil records now show a very rich fauna predating the Cambrian, the now well known Vendian or Ediacaran deposits of Australia and Russia.
All fossils from the "Cambrian explosion" were ocean-dwelling organisms. Are we now to assume that God made fish, then directed a small group to start crawling on land, evolve into amphibians, reptiles, and later to mammals, apes, and humans? Because there is an enormous amount of fossil evidence that supports subsequent development. Pointing fingers at the Cambrian explosion in the name of "intelligent design" doesn't negate the overwhelming evidence that humans are related to chimpanzees.
@macularis Look, a talking monkey! You seem to have been conditioned with a dogmatic acceptance of an athiestic worldview and a desire to attack anything that doesn’t bend over backwards to conform to it.
You’re just another paper tiger that wouldn’t know real science from a horses ass.
@Seigu007 Such anger...but why? Am I denying the existence of God? Absolutely not. Am I rejecting the Biblical story of creation, with all its contradictions and inconsistencies? Of course. I am not dogmatic--I only go where the evidence leads. And please cease with the name-calling. It does nothing to advance your argument.
@macularis Who’s evidence? Your evidence? Based on what criteria? Yours? That’s a very poor proof to submit. Thus far you’ve given me nothing but emotions as your form of logic and you need to try a little harder if you want to run with the big dogs.
@contents7 And what, exactly, has the Bible been right about? The talking snake that tricked two people into eating a fruit that made them realize they were naked?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
What is laughable to me is the darwinist will accept a few tiny fragments of bones and a portion of jawbone as proof positive of neanderthal man. They will accept a single tooth discovered in Nebraska as some awe inspiring evidence. But no matter how compelling the evidence contradicting them it is just them crazy Christians trying to make them look bad.
Hardly any accepted that tooth as evidence for anything and the drawing was made by a french cartoonist..the guy who found the tooth publicly declared the drawing to be of no scientific value..
Kirk Cameron is a lier and he has not done his research.
Who is the jackass at 2:08? From nothing? Nothing!?!?!? Try billions of years of single cell evolution! Cambrian Explosion makes total sense if you understand that single cell development was ready to take the step to multi-cell development and also the earth now had an oxygen atmosphere.
This video is a typical christian attempt to bear false witness - one of the 10 commandments they are not supposed to break or they go to hell.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
A man does not got to Hell for breaking one of the ten commandments. He goes to Hell (or is internally seperated from God) for commiting sin. We all commit sin. Rom 3:23. But God has given all humanity away out of Hell. He send his son to die in our place. Rom 5:8 As far as the Cambrian explosion. why do you \imply that a simple cell "was ready to take the step"?
RanchRoadShow, because the single cell had evolved to the point that is was of the same time as the cells in our body. This took about 2 billion years of evolution and there is tons fossil evidence.
Jesus died for your sin? 1) it is immoral to punish someone else for your sin 2) he didn't stay dead, he was only dead for 3 days, for it to be a sacrifice he would need to STAY dead. I would die to save YOU if i knew I would come back in 3 days!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Why believe in chance when it is so much more logical to believe an intelligent God create the earth? Instead of adding more time to make up for low probabilities of natural selections short comings. This is a bigger act of faith than Christianity asks for. 1) Since all sin and fall short of the glory of God and the wages (consequence) of sin is death. God choose to take on the form of Man and die in our place. This is not immoral but an act of love. Where do you base your appeal to morality?
2) God is not confined to our two-dimensional status. Jesus is fully God and fully Man. Where do you get this definition of what true sacrifice is? The Bible describes it as blood sacrifice. Blood being imperative to atone for sin, Jesus blood was shed to atone for all of mankind's sin. My hearts desire is that you some day would realize what in fact Jesus has done. True Christians only want others to share in this gift of grace. Not by what we have done, but what God has done for us.
BATRPRO, you just describled a blood cult. All I have to do is bleed for god and he will atone sins? Also, it is immoral to punish someone else (like Jesus) for someone else's sin (ours).
A god may have created the earth, but you have no proof it was the god of the bible that did it.
I'm disappointed this was one of the top results for "Cambrian Explosion". It's a bunch of people saying we've got no idea what's going on.
cshin9 5 days ago
@cshin9 It's only because the evidence from the Precambrian is sparse, but there were fossils of bilaterans and cnidarians before the Cambrian.
cshin9 5 days ago
The cambrien explosion is a stab wound. The fossil record is a series of deep cuts, and scientific research is a killing blow. Evolution did not happen and there is every reason to conclude thusly.
MagnusCattus 2 months ago
@MagnusCattus The cambrian explosion is predicted by current models of evolution due to the fact that precambrian organisms had not yet evolved the more efficient oxygen-based respritory systems
libalchris 1 month ago
@libalchris Yes a million years ago marshmellows ruled the earth, they had no bones therefore left no fossisl. Good luck my friend. To anyone rational, a tremendous lack of fossils would mean a tremendous lack of evidence for evolution, and coincedentaly fits right along with the christian creation account. Now I'm bit saying that perhaps what you have to say is meritless, but it is by faaaaaar inadequate for me.
MagnusCattus 1 month ago
@MagnusCattus "To anyone rational, a tremendous lack of fossils would mean a tremendous lack of evidence for evolution..."
First off evolution has already been proven as much as can be just through the field of genetics. Further fossils found prior to, within, and after the Cambrian support the theory and line up pretty nicely with what is known in other fields. As a final point fossils of decreasing complexity the further back in time you go stretch back for about three billion of years...
whitefox998 1 month ago
@whitefox998 Evolution as never been proved, if you are gona dance around with pretty definitions be my guest. We have seen small mutations, never ever observed macro evolution. The cambrien explosion nullifies everything you have said. AND GUESS WHAT, if a fossil looks like another one, who the hell gets to say its related? its either THE SAME CREATURE, or NOT THE SAME. see how that works? Evolution has not been proven. I'm not going to let an atheist dictate to me what is fact.
MagnusCattus 1 month ago
@MagnusCattus Evolution has been proven as much as scientifically possibly, macroevolution has been directly observed and is supported by every field in biology, and the theory is positively supported by the Cambrian explosion. And I don't have to dictate anything, I can present evidence to support my position which also flatly disproves yours. If you'd like me to I am more than willing but it'd have to be somewhere where we're aren't limited to a 500 character limit. You game?
whitefox998 1 month ago
@whitefox998 Thats a good one, did you ever hear the one about the chicken and the bookstore?....
MagnusCattus 1 month ago
@MagnusCattus So I guess your answer is no? Too bad. Willful ignorance never made much sense to me, but if that's the world you want to live in...
whitefox998 1 month ago
@MagnusCattus (cont.) So how is any of that consistent with (creationist) Christianity or anything found in Genesis?
whitefox998 1 month ago
"There is no way evolution can explain the Cambrian Explosion." If we were living in the time of Charles Darwin, this would be true. However, we are not. Scientists have not been sitting around twiddling their thumbs in the century and a half that has passed since the Origin of Species was written. Scientists have since found a perfectly reasonable explanation for the Cambrian Explosion, called punctuated equilibrium. Besides, even if science had no idea what caused the Cambrian Explosion,
ZachSolten 2 months ago
theory did not explain punctuated equilibrium. If evolution were conclusively proven wrong tommorow, the scientific community would reject it as it has done for countless other hypotheses that did not withstand the harsh light of scrutiny. The only reason that evolution became a scientific theory in the first place was due to the fact that it made accurate predictions of the results of future experiments, and all of the massing evidence found fit into them.
ZachSolten 2 months ago
First of all, there is no such thing as a Darwinist. It is merely a term invented by creationists to rationalize their opponent, by implying that people who support evolution have blind faith in its "teachings", without actually testing it. This is a good summary of religion; however, it is a terrible description of evolution and of the proponents of evolutionary theory. No one worships Charles Darwin or his ideas; the very notion is ridiculous. Charles Darwin was racist, and his original
ZachSolten 2 months ago
I see plenty of angry emotion in your posts, but very little in mine. I do not resort to name calling or referring to myself as a "big dog." And what are the credentials to be a "big dog," anyway? My evidence comes from over 150 years of research into the field of evolutionary biology, which has been independently verified by researchers around the world. There are plenty of books out there to get started--"The Making of the Fittest" by Sean B. Carroll is one of the best.
macularis 3 months ago
It has been proven, that DNA travels on energy frequencies. There are measurable rays of energy shooting out from the galactic center. Is it so radical to believe in the science that our planet is showing us? of course you would have to remove the fairy tail ideas taught from religion and Idealists. Human evolution has gaps as well not shown in history. Do we chalk it up to little green men? Or, do we open our minds and stretch the bounderies of quantum possibilities?
Therighttotruth 6 months ago
@Therighttotruth "it has been proven"? Cite it. Show me how a macromolecule made of C, H, N, O, and P can travel by anything other than the known atomic forces. Be prepared to show your work. "Measurable rays of energy"? Uh, you mean radio? At a powerlevel far weaker than anything found on the planet?
NorthForkFisherman 5 months ago
God of the gaps = failed argument.
Arikiel 6 months ago
@Arikiel atheism = failed religion
Seigu007 3 months ago
Folks, please don't listen to the knuckleheads in this video. Get your information from real scientists and experts in the field. There are fossils from before the Cambrian. Look up the small shelly fauna (Ediacaran period), even stromatolites (the world's oldest fossils, from over 2.5 billion years ago). There are also good scientific reasons why few fossils exist from earlier periods. An excellent book about the real science is "Evolution: What the Fossils Mean and Why It Matters."
jingle3 6 months ago 4
I got the name of the book wrong. It's "Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters," by Donald Prothero. A great book that, even though it is written by a scientist in the field, is easily understood by the layman.
jingle3 6 months ago
@jingle3 Great book.
77Totems 6 months ago
Evolutionists are carried over edge with their obsession with evolution "theory"... Even Darwin himself has doubts after cambrian explosion... Cambrian "explosion" is still a mystery to be solved... Evolution proven not able to answer this event...
dino339 6 months ago
@dino339 It's interesting to hear creationists talk about the "Cambrian explosion." Invariably, they rely on data that appears to be from circa 1850, and obviously, they know nothing about myriad discoveries in the 160 years since about the fossil record prior to the Cambrian, or about atmospheric and other physical conditions on Earth in the distant past. Incidentally, despite the claims of the willfully ignorant, the so-called Cambrian explosion took place over about 20 million years.
WildwoodClaire1 6 months ago
@WildwoodClaire1 evolution as a theory is still a weak concept, there are no fossils found that shows the transition to evolution to this Date!! and also no pre-cambrian fossiles found... i dare to ask any evolution believer to link me to ONE Valid scientific source that shows REAL fossil that shows Real transition!!!!!
dino339 6 months ago
@dino339 Actually, quite a lot of Precambrian fossils have been discovered over the past 150 years. For example, Stromatolites are well known from the Precambrian. What appears to have happened in the period between 600 and 400 million years ago was that oxygen levels in the atmosphere gradually approached the levels of today and organsims capable of generating calcareous and siliceous exoskeletons evolved. Organisms with hard parts are more likely to be preserved as fossils.
WildwoodClaire1 6 months ago
@dino339 It isn't difficult to find lists of transitional fossils. Google "transitional fossils." Better still, take a biology class. You speak of "belief," but acceptance of evolution is based on myriad physical evidence and over 150 years of peer-reviewed research. I suppose the sheer mass of evidence for biological evolution does make your situation as a devotee of a particulatr ancient mythology lamentable, but reality can sometimes be a bit painful.
WildwoodClaire1 6 months ago 3
@dino339 Dr. Donald Prothero's book, The Fossils Say Yes.
Can you tell me why whales have vesstigal legs if they had not once been land animals?
77Totems 6 months ago
@dino339 Why don't you do your own research instead of parroting the lies you hear in these videos by (Christian!!!) creationists? You asked for transitional fossils so smugly as if you think they don’t exist, you do realize you are wrong don’t you? Why don’t you use Google, there is a ton of info out there on the web, are you scared to look? Why? Are you not going to believe it anyway so you don’t bother? Anyways here’s a start, type this into Google “Evolution of mammalian auditory ossicles”.
PhaseBlur 6 months ago
@dino339 As has already been mentioned there are many animals living today that already fulfill your transitional criteria. Whales evolved from a wolf sized land mammal that lived some 60 million years ago but are now full aquatic. They still have all the mammalian traits, i.e. they give birth to live young which in tern feed from their mothers mammary glands, they return to the surface to breath, and some species still show evidence of vestigial limb and pelvic structures, and so on...
PhaseBlur 6 months ago
@PhaseBlur You didn't link me to any scientific resource, therefore your explanation will remain for me only as "thoughts".
dino339 6 months ago
Too bad the Cambrian explosion completely invalidates biblical creation, isn't it. See the Burgess Shales---the largest fossil deposits from the Camrian. What is found there? All sorts of wierd things, but no fish, no mammals, no dinosaurs, no reptiles, no hominids, in fact NO VERTEBRATES AT ALL--> nothing with a backbone. Creationism says everything was created in 6 days, but here is evidence that is complete crap. What is the answer? Evolution! Too bad, sooo sad.
pontecanis 8 months ago
Creatards don't even know what a Phyla is.
''From nothing came almost everything'' WRONG
There was several Billion years of evolution before the Cambrian Period.
Only the major Phyla appeared, not everything...no land animals at all.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@gregrutz Nearly a billion and a half, to be more accurate. Life has spent a billion years being single-celled; then it spent another half a billion years, with the most elaborate living things being very simple multi-celled organisms, including sponges.
OF COURSE bacteria doesn't fossilize; only bones and shells fossilize. Sharks don't fossilize either, having cartilaginous skeletons; we only get teeth from them.
This video is so ridiculously full of shit. Obvious creatards.
StrikaAmaru 1 year ago
This (and part 2) are comedy gold! I will have to do a vid response just to the points that are plain false. One point that is important to realize is that there are 36 currently recognized animal phyla, of these 5 are Precambrian, 10 are Cambrian, 8 appear after the Cambrian, and 13 have no known fossil record but are alive today. What about plants and fungi? ALL appear after the Cambrian. Kind of hard to explain in a Genesis framework, isn't it?
LithodidMan 1 year ago
OH MY GOD!! Darwin was wrong about slow and gradual ! The theory is wrong and had to be updated, it was not alway gradual. Wow ! And he didn't even know about the 5 or 6 great mass extinctions, like the one that killed the dinosaurs.
gregrutz 1 year ago
315,360,000,000,000 seconds should be 10 milion years if my calculator didn't fail me.... what a short amount of time!
anybody care to look up how long it takes a simple RNA molecule to replicate? :)
GronTheMighty 1 year ago
@GronTheMighty
10 million years, oh, dear; we barely have time to wipe our nose :)) Never mind that the oldest Homo Sapiens branch is less than 4 my old, and how many branches evolved and went extinct since then.
Or that a quick peek at Wikipedia puts the Cambrian explosion as lasting between 30 and 50 my.
Or that the evidence for evolution extends well beyond fossils, into genetics, comparative morphological analysis, and others. In not one fossil existed, evolution would still stand on these
StrikaAmaru 1 year ago
@StrikaAmaru Indeed, evolutionary theory is probably amongst the most well-supported scientific theories we have ever examined.. and how enriching is it not!?
I find that just the perspective it gives to view individual organisms in this theoretical paradigm is breathtakingly beautiful, meaningful, and enlarges the importance and value of virtually every aspect of an organisms existence to a degree that is nigh-unfathomable! :)
GronTheMighty 1 year ago
This is just so out of date !! Its been out evolved !!
BunkyOhare 1 year ago
@BunkyOhare It's worse than out-of-date: it's deliberate lying:
- the cambr expl: 30-50 my, NOT 10.
- fossilization: bacteria won't fossilize; the closest we have to fossils are carbonaceous or silicate-based shells that single-celled organisms make around them. Not all make such shells, just like not all multi-celled organisms have a skeleton.
- evolution: is also supported by genetics, and others. A misplaced fossil would topple evolution, but lack of transitional forms in a small area won't.
StrikaAmaru 1 year ago
they sya it happened over night "in geological sense" meaning that they actually didnt just appear, in geology you talk about the world being formed a year ago, that is the geological sense of time... therefore we say that the first upright human from 16000 years ago appeared yesterday in "GEOLOGICAL SENSE" this isnt saying that they just appeared with no evolution so this is saying god is a myth :P
almika360 1 year ago
Hehe.. oh man.. how are you not just completely embarrassed by this? A complete lack of shame must be a prerequisite of Creationism.
SofaKingLoaded 1 year ago
"All these differences appear all together at the same time."
.
They evolved over 10 million years which is hardly, "at the same time".
.
"The suddenness of it defies the Darwinian mechanism's ability to produce new structures." What? Have none of these PhDs read Steven Gould? How about getting up to date with the science. Punctuated equilibrium anyone?
.
This video is rife with distortions and omissions filtered through shoddy scholarship. This crap wouldn't last a moment under peer review.
Noisegator 1 year ago
I think this is telling us that God make animals
rebeccaliang2 1 year ago
''appearance of a wide range of organisms''
No, it is the evolution of the major Phyla.
gregrutz 1 year ago
Wow, what a horrible mis-representation of the cambrian explosion, and why the hell are they dwelling on what darwin said? these people think we haven't learned anything since darwin, they are that backwards. There is no "problem" for evolution from the cambrian explosion, these animals evolved over about 20 million years, in what way is that fast? and the "wide gradually narrow" thing doesn't make sense, are they stating that these phyla joined together at some point?
HODthunderwolf 1 year ago
Nice try creationists, trying to turn scientific data against itself. Low blow. Then again with no facts of your own you have to steal something resembling common sense from somewhere.
tafftastic 1 year ago
@tafftastic but who made this video after all?
fondofletters 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@fondofletters "but who made this video after all?"
.
Obviously creationists made it. Every trick in the creationist playbook is offered here and every distortion, exclusion, presumption and outright lie makes an appearance as well.
.
The text refers people to the ColdwaterMedia site, the infamous producers of "EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed", Ben (the weasle) Steins appalling propaganda piece. That should settle the pedigree of this pile of tripe too.
Noisegator 1 year ago
Let's use something that happened 520 million years ago to prove a young earth.
Nice.
gregrutz 1 year ago
The Cambrian Period was 60 million years long.
Darwin was wrong about 'gradual', his theory is 150 years old.
Everyone in the Cambrian Period has a mom and dad, just like today.
They fould all the transitionals fossils, proving the theory correct.
The PHYLA appeared, all the animals were small marine creatures, all extinct today. No land animals had evolved yet.
There are 2 Billion years of evolution leading up to the explosion.
gregrutz 1 year ago
Its funny how many creationists believe that the earth was created 6-10k years ago.. and then try to use the cambrian explosion to try to disprove evolution.. eventhough it was mllions of years ago hahaha
ricoswerve1260 1 year ago
This video is creationism in disguise. The rate of evolution is not a constant and environmental factors made the Cambrian era a time with rapid evolution. Not all phyla came to exist in this timeframe. And only life in water existed. It's quite silly to think that some invisible magician God existed during those many 10 million years dropping lifeforms into water from the sky, isn't it? And surely such an imagined God is a different God than the God of the Bible :-)
ThinkingBetter 1 year ago
This clip is definitely out of date. What about the various fossils from the Ediacaran period (the period before the Cambrian, and thus before the Cambrian explosion)?
aitch748 1 year ago
when they say suddenly, its actully millions and millions of years between 5 and 10 million years
deepwinter77 1 year ago
Jesus did it.....after he turned the water into wine and beat the money changer.
lipoicacid 1 year ago
How can they use something that happened 520 million years ago to prove YEC?
@2:08 'From nothing, we have everything" Bull Shit, liar!
There was 2 Billion years of evolution before the Cambrian Period,
and only small marine creatures existed in this period, none of which live today.
gregrutz 1 year ago
All this video does is exploit a false dichotomy: finding a hole in evolutionary science automatically verifies a god.
StopSpamming1 1 year ago
@StopSpamming1 well, it's not even a hole...
atheistnarutofan 1 year ago
The DNA tree matches this tree they can't find.
Everyone in the sudden 50 million long Cambrian period, had a mom and a dad.
They did fill in the gaps, now we have twice as many gaps >LOL
Twice the problem?? no, they all show evolution happened.
There was several Billion years of life evolving before the 'explasion', it had to get going at some point.
gregrutz 1 year ago
More like 50 million years.
And small marine creatures were the only thing evolved. No land animals.
gregrutz 2 years ago
The information here is quite outdated and intended to disseminate lies about evolution in order to promote intelligent design and the Christian theocratic worldview. It features a staunch Unification Church 'moonie' Jonathan Wells, whose intent is to spread the pseudoscience of intelligent design among the scientific community and the general public. Fossil records now show a very rich fauna predating the Cambrian, the now well known Vendian or Ediacaran deposits of Australia and Russia.
charadester 2 years ago 3
@charadester if it is... show me where it is up to date... i really want to see what you are talking about
shoonger001 1 year ago
the moment i saw Jonathan Wells i knew this video was doomed to fail lol
Piersmaru 2 years ago
@2;20 The explosion [evolution] is real,
explaining it [Theory of evolution] is controversial.
gregrutz 2 years ago
Every creationst video is the same........
Evolution says......
Darwinists say........
According to Atheists........
Evolutionists claim......
gregrutz 2 years ago
Either way you aregonna hate Christians. Once they start learning to love, you Non-Christains are starting to hate....how odd
LocoRico89 2 years ago 2
13 million years is not abrupt. You anti evolution people trot out the same lies that contain the same internal contradictions.
and of course, there were multicelluar precursors pre Cambrian, which you lie about. Repeating a lie often enough doesn't make it true.
robertmike57 2 years ago 4
All fossils from the "Cambrian explosion" were ocean-dwelling organisms. Are we now to assume that God made fish, then directed a small group to start crawling on land, evolve into amphibians, reptiles, and later to mammals, apes, and humans? Because there is an enormous amount of fossil evidence that supports subsequent development. Pointing fingers at the Cambrian explosion in the name of "intelligent design" doesn't negate the overwhelming evidence that humans are related to chimpanzees.
macularis 2 years ago 33
@macularis Look, a talking monkey! You seem to have been conditioned with a dogmatic acceptance of an athiestic worldview and a desire to attack anything that doesn’t bend over backwards to conform to it.
You’re just another paper tiger that wouldn’t know real science from a horses ass.
Seigu007 3 months ago
@Seigu007 Such anger...but why? Am I denying the existence of God? Absolutely not. Am I rejecting the Biblical story of creation, with all its contradictions and inconsistencies? Of course. I am not dogmatic--I only go where the evidence leads. And please cease with the name-calling. It does nothing to advance your argument.
macularis 3 months ago
@macularis Who’s evidence? Your evidence? Based on what criteria? Yours? That’s a very poor proof to submit. Thus far you’ve given me nothing but emotions as your form of logic and you need to try a little harder if you want to run with the big dogs.
Seigu007 3 months ago
Perhaps,maybe, could have been...just love all this empirical science... LOL
Perhaps, maybe, could be... the Bible is right...Young Earth.
rustysruger 2 years ago
hmm, it has been right about quite a few things.
contents7 2 years ago
@contents7 And what, exactly, has the Bible been right about? The talking snake that tricked two people into eating a fruit that made them realize they were naked?
macularis 2 years ago 6
@rustysruger Bible right ?????
The two accounts clearly differ in the order of creation.
Gen1:25-27 humans are created after other animals
Gen2:18-19 humans created before other animals.
That's a contradiction. It comes from two different camps.
The Yahwist and Eulogist camps.
Gen1:27 man and woman are created at the same time
Gen2:18-22 Adam first, then animals, then Eve
gregrutz 2 years ago 2
Biology textbooks are misleading because they leave out the Cambrian explosion?I'm pretty sure they do
Is it ok to lie 30 sec. into a video as long as your lying for Jesus?
snakeguy76 2 years ago
Man....creationists - please evolve out of the bronze age
Mams31383 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
What is laughable to me is the darwinist will accept a few tiny fragments of bones and a portion of jawbone as proof positive of neanderthal man. They will accept a single tooth discovered in Nebraska as some awe inspiring evidence. But no matter how compelling the evidence contradicting them it is just them crazy Christians trying to make them look bad.
technomagi2009 2 years ago
Hardly any accepted that tooth as evidence for anything and the drawing was made by a french cartoonist..the guy who found the tooth publicly declared the drawing to be of no scientific value..
Kirk Cameron is a lier and he has not done his research.
I assume it's that tooth you are talking about..
Korkzor 2 years ago
Who is the jackass at 2:08? From nothing? Nothing!?!?!? Try billions of years of single cell evolution! Cambrian Explosion makes total sense if you understand that single cell development was ready to take the step to multi-cell development and also the earth now had an oxygen atmosphere.
This video is a typical christian attempt to bear false witness - one of the 10 commandments they are not supposed to break or they go to hell.
ndyt 2 years ago 5
i agree. there were alrdy procariotes that grouped togeather and formed eucariotes.
doombow666 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
A man does not got to Hell for breaking one of the ten commandments. He goes to Hell (or is internally seperated from God) for commiting sin. We all commit sin. Rom 3:23. But God has given all humanity away out of Hell. He send his son to die in our place. Rom 5:8 As far as the Cambrian explosion. why do you \imply that a simple cell "was ready to take the step"?
RanchRoadShow 2 years ago
RanchRoadShow, because the single cell had evolved to the point that is was of the same time as the cells in our body. This took about 2 billion years of evolution and there is tons fossil evidence.
Jesus died for your sin? 1) it is immoral to punish someone else for your sin 2) he didn't stay dead, he was only dead for 3 days, for it to be a sacrifice he would need to STAY dead. I would die to save YOU if i knew I would come back in 3 days!
ndyt 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Why believe in chance when it is so much more logical to believe an intelligent God create the earth? Instead of adding more time to make up for low probabilities of natural selections short comings. This is a bigger act of faith than Christianity asks for. 1) Since all sin and fall short of the glory of God and the wages (consequence) of sin is death. God choose to take on the form of Man and die in our place. This is not immoral but an act of love. Where do you base your appeal to morality?
BATRPRO 2 years ago
2) God is not confined to our two-dimensional status. Jesus is fully God and fully Man. Where do you get this definition of what true sacrifice is? The Bible describes it as blood sacrifice. Blood being imperative to atone for sin, Jesus blood was shed to atone for all of mankind's sin. My hearts desire is that you some day would realize what in fact Jesus has done. True Christians only want others to share in this gift of grace. Not by what we have done, but what God has done for us.
BATRPRO 2 years ago
BATRPRO, you just describled a blood cult. All I have to do is bleed for god and he will atone sins? Also, it is immoral to punish someone else (like Jesus) for someone else's sin (ours).
A god may have created the earth, but you have no proof it was the god of the bible that did it.
ndyt 2 years ago 6
Comment removed
contents7 2 years ago
god is imaginary
Mams31383 2 years ago
This isn't a Christian video, though...
aurayon 2 years ago
By abrupt do you mean 10 ti 15 million years?
sweatytoothmadman 2 years ago 27
so what would this event be biblically, because i do not trust their timeframes??
would this be some type of post-flood repopulation of earth?
Leiflton 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I don't trust a scientist's time frames, but I'll trust the bible's.
KRYMNAL42069 2 years ago
Major Burn!
iToyRobot 2 years ago